Remove ads

Noblesse Oblige [Znt/SI]

Reader mode
shadenight123 said:
One year of a crash course in etiquette, one year of teaching someone how to be respectable to others, and it all went down the drain the moment she learned she was the Holy Mind of God and as a familiar of the King no matter what Isabella said, she couldn't punish or sentence her to death.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

So Anne was polite and respectful until she realized that she wasn't going to be executed.
Then she immediately began to act like a self-important, egotistical brat.

Sounds like she learned "Noble Manners" perfectly.
 
Just a quick question: how are Henry's skills at magic progressing? Since you haven't mentioned it in forever, I assume that he basically stagnated (degraded?) in skill since he stopped getting training from his mother. Is he still a line mage?

Independent of that, can somebody who knows canon tell me whether mages can actually degrade in "class"? By that I mean, if a square class mage doesn't use square class spells for months/years/decades, will he eventually lose the ability to cast said spells?
 
Zealot said:
Just a quick question: how are Henry's skills at magic progressing? Since you haven't mentioned it in forever, I assume that he basically stagnated (degraded?) in skill since he stopped getting training from his mother. Is he still a line mage?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

He is Triangle.
Zealot said:
Independent of that, can somebody who knows canon tell me whether mages can actually degrade in "class"? By that I mean, if a square class mage doesn't use square class spells for months/years/decades, will he eventually lose the ability to cast said spells?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No.
 
shadenight123 said:
He supposedly has a fine collection of Albion white wine that he still manages to import." She grinned, "A bottle of the finest year would be opened for us without a doubt-"

"How you can love white wine," I shuddered, "Red wine is where true wine stands! Proud, rich, Romalian!"

Isabella bristled and then huffed. "Your taste in wines is barbaric, Henry, but we forgive you."
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The funny thing is that there is research that has been done to prove that humans can't actually distinguish the difference between red and white wines except by color... that is if you add red food coloring to white wine in appropriate ratios, even professional wine critics cannot tell the difference between a glass of red wine and a glass of red colored white wine by taste.
 
Last edited:
Not sure I believe that. I'm absolutely useless at wine and even I can tell the difference. Though, I suppose you could intentionally cultivate a white that's similar to a red...
 
Wonderlost said:
The funny thing is that there is research that has been done to prove that humans can't actually distinguish the difference between red and white wines except by color... that is if you add red food coloring to white wine in appropriate ratios, even professional wine critics cannot tell the difference between a glass of red wine and a glass of red colored white wine by taste.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That's pure bullshit. Well, kinda. There is a lot of variance in wine, even in just white wine and in just red wine, thus you could have a white wine that had a taste that's close enough to a red wine that, with the color disguised, one could confuse it for one, and vice versa, but by the same logic humans can't taste the difference between tenderloin and ribs.
 
Wonderlost said:
The funny thing is that there is research that has been done to prove that humans can't actually distinguish the difference between red and white wines except by color... that is if you add red food coloring to white wine in appropriate ratios, even professional wine critics cannot tell the difference between a glass of red wine and a glass of red colored white wine by taste.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I wonder... should I bother? Well I've never been one to succumb to despair even if past experience indicates that no will ever convince people that surveys prove only that the people selected chose the answers they chose. Largely because that isn't as interesting an answer as the narrative the person administering the survey was likely aiming for. Now they do indicate things, but by and large people take them far too seriously. There is a reason after all that statistics are colloquially known as the worst type of lie. Just as an example I could mention the fact that in 2012 workplace deaths in approximately 90% percent of cases happened to men rather than women in the united states. If I worded this properly I could make a convincing case for America hating men as evidenced by employers apart lack of regard for their lives.

Yet that isn't what the numbers said. All they said is that more men died at work than women, and while perhaps it is due in part to disdain there are also a lot of factors that most likely contribute to this such as coal miners, the military(especially in the front lines), fire fighters and other high risk professions are almost exclusively done by men rather than simple disdain. Perhaps there is a trend for humans to view men as expendable: but even if I happened to do so personally I would struggle to prove that anyone else did as well.

Here is the deal regarding this specific trial is that first, there was obviously a goal regarding this study which makes everything it indicates nearly as suspect as a study done by Gatorade showing that sports drinks cure cancer, and there are some subtle social expectations of wine connoisseurs that this study may not have done enough to isolate. Just as an example a professional wine connoisseur should be able to tell the difference between a white and a red and it would be embarrassing to admit they tasted the same to his or her palette in this case. Add in that many of the words used in the study only have real meaning in the realm of wine. None of them claimed that one tasted like fermented grapes while the other tasted like fermented oranges. Instead they used terms like "earthy(gross)" and "mossy(also gross)" and "oaken(...ok?)" and "dry(not actually in this case, but I still hate it)". By the way the last has always bugged because I, personally, have never had the slightest clue what people are talking about when they say that one.
 
Last edited:
I think, if Isabella ever try familiar summoning ritual, she will be summoning a cat. Just to be contradictory to Henry's love of feathered beings, and cat actually suits her personality. And then there will be murder, and new pillow for Henry.:V

Oh god, the meeting with Duke D'Orleans actually went fine, which was better than a lot of stories I read/watched. I expected the worst tbh. Isabella Best Wife for Henry. Charles underestimated Joseph's capabilities as King, isn't he? Their relationship feels too much like Kotomine Kirei and Tohsaka Tokiomi for my taste, with the subsequent backstabbing moment in canon except it was poisoning for Charles. For him to actually preparing to take the throne, well, he must have been taught since his formative years by the previous Queen to be expecting the Court to somehow dethrone Joseph and picked him as King instead. Except that didn't happen and he lost his influence in the aftermath.

Isabella actually knew about the man cave? Which means she is aware of Mathilda and Tiffania's existence, and of course from where they came from because Isaisa is brilliant like that.
 
My reaction:
shadenight123 said:
The return to the Duchy of Brittany saw me welcomed by a murder.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Oh no!
A murder of crows.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Fuck you.
shadenight123 said:
I tapped her forehead gently once, and then knelt in front of her, grinning broadly. "Truth can have more than one side, my dear Isabella," and with that, I gave her a quick kiss before standing back up. "But since I'm a barbarian, I'll go be with my animals-those tiny baby crows await me!"
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well that is savage.
 
Yay off-topic tangent time!
Cold Burn said:
Here is the deal regarding this specific trial is that first, there was obviously a goal regarding this study which makes everything it indicates a suspect as a study done by Gatorade showing that sports drinks cure cancer, and there are some subtle social expectations of wine connoisseurs that this study may not have done enough to isolate. Just as an example a professional wine connoisseur should be able to tell the difference between a white and a red and it would be embarrassing to admit they tasted the same to his or her palette in this case. Add in that many of the words used in the study only have real meaning in the realm of wine. None of them claimed that one tasted like fermented grapes while the other tasted like fermented oranges.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Which study are you talking about? Or are you just talking in general terms? 'Cause there's a specific one that popular media usually cites for the claim that 'experts can't tell apart white wine and red wine'.
Wonderlost said:
The funny thing is that there is research that has been done to prove that humans can't actually distinguish the difference between red and white wines except by color... that is if you add red food coloring to white wine in appropriate ratios, even professional wine critics cannot tell the difference between a glass of red wine and a glass of red colored white wine by taste.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Err...are you talking about the 2001 Morrot, Brochet, Dubourdieu experiment? It's one of the only ones directly on this topic. That experiment merely showed that the visual color overwhelmingly affected perceptions of the odor of wine, and that traditional descriptors of white and red wine odors were inaccurate at distinguishing between the two.

First, 54 oenology students were given a glass of white wine and a glass of red wine. The students, asked to describe the odor of each, gave traditionally white wine flavor descriptors to the white wine and traditionally red wine flavor descriptors to the red wine. Pretty straightforward.

The following week, the students were given a glass of white wine and a glass of white wine dyed red. The students, asked to describe the odor of each, gave traditionally white wine descriptors to the white wine and traditionally red wine flavor descriptors to the white wine dyed red.

And that's all. While the paper itself was pretty darn cool and had huge implications for wine-tasting, it has been generalized and exaggerated to hell in popular media.
 
Last edited:
Oh I am slain! said:
Yay off-topic tangent time!

Which study are you talking about? Or are you just talking in general terms? 'Cause there's a specific one that popular media usually cites for the claim that 'experts can't tell apart white wine and red wine'.

Err...are you talking about the 2001 Morrot, Brochet, Dubourdieu experiment? It's one of the only ones directly on this topic. That experiment merely showed that the visual color overwhelmingly affected perceptions of the odor of wine, and that traditional descriptors of white and red wine odors were inaccurate at distinguishing between the two.

First, 54 oenology students were given a glass of white wine and a glass of red wine. The students, asked to describe the odor of each, gave traditionally white wine flavor descriptors to the white wine and traditionally red wine flavor descriptors to the red wine. Pretty straightforward.

The following week, the students were given a glass of white wine and a glass of white wine dyed red. The students, asked to describe the odor of each, gave traditionally white wine descriptors to the white wine and traditionally red wine flavor descriptors to the white wine dyed red.

And that's all. While the paper itself was pretty darn cool and had huge implications for wine-tasting, it's been generalized and exaggerated to hell in popular media.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yep that is the one. I didn't feel the need to link it since I was fairly certain that was the study he( or she as I'm too lazy to check to if he or she decided to inform us) referred to.
 
Last edited:
As someone who has studied wine tasting at an ivy league university (because when you have the opportunity to be the single most pretentious prick in the world you damn well take it), I can confirm that it is possible to distinguish between white and red wines by taste. The average person cannot do so, neither can most self-proclaimed connoisseurs, but it is possible if you spend a semester of your senior year taking a class that has no business being so bloody difficult.
 
Last edited:
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top